On 2/19/2026 11:24 AM, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> On Thu Feb 19, 2026 at 4:44 PM CET, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2/19/2026 10:27 AM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 12:21:56PM +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>>>> On Wed Feb 18, 2026 at 9:55 PM CET, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>>>>> +RUST TO C LIST INTERFACES
>>>> Maybe this should just be "RUST [FFI]" instead (in case Alex and you want
>>>> to
>>>> sign up for looking after FFI helper infrastructure in general)?
>>>
>>> Good idea, done.
>>
>> Actually, I am not sure we want to commit to entire RUST FFI infra though its
>> pretty tiny right now. Most of this infra right now is clist, let us start
>> with
>> keeping it as is "RUST TO C LIST INTERFACES" ? Or we could make it "C LIST
>> INTERFACES [RUST]" sections.
>
> I feel like it makes a bit more sense to have an entry for the entire class of
> "RUST [FFI]" infrastructure.
>
> I could imagine that we will find quite some more cases where an FFI
> abstraction
> layer makes sense; at some point it might even go the other way around.
>
> Once that happens, I think it would be good to have people looking after
> intermediate FFI layers in general. But it does not have to be you of course.
>
> Maybe we can create the "RUST [FFI]" entry already with the following
> constraint:
>
> RUST [FFI]
> M: Joel Fernandes <[email protected]> (CLIST)
> M: Alexandre Courbot <[email protected]> (CLIST)
> L: [email protected]
> S: Maintained
> F: rust/kernel/ffi/
Yeah, this is a good idea. I am Ok with that. Alex/Miguel, you're Ok with this
too?
If all in agreement, I can make this change for next revision.
Thanks,
--
Joel Fernandes
